Many prominent persons have adopted a cause, using their prominence and money to support their chosen cause. For example, Bill Gates created a foundation that works to improve the lives of the world’s poorest persons. Sometimes prominent persons adopt false causes, wasting their time and money in pursuit of a dubious goal. The billionaire trio of Henry Paulson, Michael Bloomberg and Tom Steyer have been bamboozled by global warming profiteers.
The 3 billionaires have commissioned a study to promote the global warming scare. It is very clear that the billionaires have embarked on a fool’s quest. Even if one believes in the dubious computer projections of global warming doom, it is clear that the billionaires’ approach does not make sense. They imply that CO2 reduction policies should be adopted in the U.S. and they give the impression that this will result in prevention of a global warming catastrophe. But the CO2 emissions mainly come from Asia and that is where the rapid growth of emissions is. Emissions in the U.S. have been declining. Reducing emissions from the United States is basically a waste of time because even if U.S. emissions were reduced to zero, according to global warming theory it wouldn’t make much difference in the face of massive and rapidly growing emissions in Asia.
Ethanol and other biofuel mandates and subsidies got started when politicians bought into claims that we are rapidly depleting our petroleum, and fossil-fuel-driven global warming is boiling the planet.
Hydraulic fracturing destroyed the depletion myth. It also reminds us that “peak oil” applies only if we wrongly assume that resource needs and technologies never change. The 18-year “hiatus” in planetary warming has forced alarmists to change their terminology to climate change, climate disruption and extreme weather mantras – which allow them to continue demanding that we stop using the hydrocarbons that provide 82% of the energy that makes our economy, jobs and living standards possible.
In recent years, people have discovered that ethanol harms lawn mowers and other small engines. The fuel additive also drives up gasoline prices, reduces automotive mileage and corrodes engine parts.
Corn-for-ethanol growers make a lot of money. But meat, egg and fish producers pay more for feed, driving up family food bills. Biofuel mandates also mean aid agencies pay more for corn and wheat, so more malnourished people go hungry longer. This is not what most would call “environmental justice.”
Follow the money.The Globe and Mail recently ran an article about Friends of Science’s latest press release featuring an image of our new billboard which stated that “Global warming stopped naturally 16+ years ago.”
While we were pleased that the Globe picked up the story, there was so much its article missed.
Our press release, for instance, challenged a letter from Greenpeace which threatened corporate officers for alleged ‘climate denial.’ It also announced a report entitled “Power. Full Benefits” that rebuts the Pembina Institute’s push for a renewable energy strategy in Alberta. These are important initiatives.
But the Globe article focused on only one main area: our sources of funding.
Mother Nature is doing what she does best without any help from humans, and the global warmists aren't happy about it. Not to worry, temps should be back to normal next week. From AccuWeather (emphasis added):
More records were broken on Thursday across the central and southern portions of the United States as autumn-like air maintained its grip on the eastern half of the country.
More temperature records are likely to fall on Friday from the southern Plains to the Southeast with daytime temperatures not rising out of the 70s.
Daytime temperatures on Thursday in parts of Kansas, Oklahoma and Arkansas failed to rise out of the 60s due to the combination of thick cloud cover and occasional rain.
Good news for penguin fans. The global population of penguins has boomed in the last 20 years, despite warnings from environmentalists that penguin numbers would dwindle as global warming melted the polar ice caps.
New reports, however, show these predictions were wrong. The latest reports indicate the number of pairs of Adélie Penguins have increased 53 percent in the last 20 years and the total pairs of Emperor Penguins have increased between 36 and 76 percent during the same time.
A census done by US researchers shows the Adélie Penguin “breeding population 53% larger (3.79 million breeding pairs) than the last estimate in 1993.” The global census was published earlier this month by the American Ornithologists’ Union.
The census also adds that “Adelie Penguin declines on the Antarctic Peninsula are more than offset by increases in East Antarctica.” Eastern Antarctica has seen huge increases in sea ice coverage which provide food for penguin colonies in the south pole.
Could the radical-Green movement in America make mankind’s future resemble a science-fiction Earth ruled by apes?
This weekend I went to the see the blockbuster movie Planet of the Apes, and an Investor’s Business Daily editorial this week got me thinking about a bleak scenario. Our future won’t have ape rulers, but, IBD points out, a world without energy might well look similar.
In the movie, bands of humans are resisting a global government of super-intelligent monkeys, gorillas and the like. The humans lack access to electricity, making their struggle — let along the normal life we know today — nearly impossible.
Ninety percent of the people living in sub-Saharan Africa do not have electricity and lack light to study and work by, refrigeration to prevent food spoilage and power to operate equipment that could multiply their productivity.Having recently returned from The Heartland Institute’s 9th International Conference on Climate Change held in Las Vegas from July 7-9, “Just Don’t Wonder About Global Warming, Understand It,” I was privileged to hear some of the world’s hundreds of leading climate scientists and researcher discuss the latest state of global warming science, all who question whether manmade global warming” will be harmful to plants, animals, or human welfare.
Eight hundred participants were on hand to hear 64 speakers from 12 different countries (14 countries if counting the moon with Astronaut Walter Cunningham and Washington, D.C.) despite the fierce heat of Las Vegas in July. At one point 4,000 individuals were listening to the conference as it was streamed live from the conference website in Las Vegas.
Pick a letter and proceed from there.William M. Briggs, statistician to the stars, is having a contest to rename global warming. Check out this tongue-and-cheek commentary and how you, too, can get the accolades you truly deserve:
Andrew Jackson (@yodacomplex) reminded me of the screwy history of the thing that was Global Warming. The phrase has undergone many revisions, examples of which are:
- Climate Change,
- Climate Cataclysm,
- Climate Chaos,
- Climate Disruption.
Readers will have noticed the evident Anglo-Saxon preference for alliteration. If only the atmosphere would have cooperated with any of these terms, we’d at least have had a more interesting topic of conversation than The Consensus.
Is the party finally over for global-warming carpetbagger Tom Steyer?How bad can it be? After all, Tom Steyer has managed to rent out the Senate in March, forcing Democrats into an embarrassing all-nighter to protest a lack of action on climate change in a chamber where they control the agenda. That, however, rested on Steyer’s strength in personal wealth, not his ability to bundle big dollars for Democratic PACs. According to Politico, the billionaire hedge-fund exec has flopped on his pledge to raise $50 million and make climate change a central issue in the midterms:
Billionaire environmentalist Tom Steyer is falling far short on his pledge to raise $50 million in outside money to make climate change a midterm-election weapon against the GOP.
His super PAC, NextGen Climate Action, has raised just $1.2 million from other donors toward that goal, according to still-unreleased figures that his aides shared with POLITICO. And he appears to be struggling to woo wealthy allies in his effort to compete with big-money conservative donors — leading some supporters to question whether his fundraising goal is realistic.
After almost a decade of heated political debate, Australia has become the world's first developed nation to repeal carbon laws that put a price on greenhouse gas emissions. In a vote that could highlight the difficulty in implementing additional measures to reduce carbon emissions ahead of global climate talks next year in Paris, Australia's Senate on Wednesday voted 39-32 to repeal a politically divisive carbon emissions price that contributed to the fall from power of three Australian leaders since it was first suggested in 2007. --Rob Taylor and Rhiannon Hoyle, The Wall Street Journal, 17 July 2014
If I could address a few words to the Australian people – you voted to scrap the tax in September last year and today the Parliament finally listened. Today, the tax that you voted to get rid of is finally gone. A useless, destructive tax which damaged jobs, which hurt families' cost of living and which didn't actually help the environment is finally gone. --Prime Minister Tony Abbott, Canberra, 17 July 2014
Out of the confusion, conspiracy and chaos of the Senate’s tortured carbon tax debate, has wrought a victory. After campaigning against a “carbon tax’’ at two elections and tapping into public dissatisfaction over Labor’s climate change policy for more than five years, the Prime Minister can declare the carbon tax repealed. With his budget and political standing under pressure Abbott dearly needed a clear victory. Today he has it. The carbon tax is repealed and his biggest promise is fulfilled. Climate change policy is now left in abeyance, while consumers will expect lower prices for electricity and gas. --Dennis Shanahan, The Australian, 17 July 2014
AbbottThis is called listening to the people. From the NY Times:
The Senate voted 39 to 32 on Thursday to repeal the so-called carbon tax after Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s conservative government secured the support of a number of independent senators. The House of Representatives had voted earlier in the week to repeal the unpopular measure, which has been a highly contentious issue in Australian politics for seven years.
The tax was devised to penalize hundreds of Australia’s biggest producers of carbon emissions, setting a price of 23 Australian dollars, or $21.50, per metric ton of carbon dioxide when it was put into effect in 2012 under then-Prime Minister Julia Gillard of the Labor Party, which is now in the opposition. The price rose to 25 Australian dollars this month.
Emanuel"It's kind of like telling a little girl who's trying to run across a busy street to catch a school bus to go for it, knowing there's a substantial chance that she'll be killed. She might make it. But it's a big gamble to take."
This, according to Kerry Emanuel, a professor of atmospheric science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, is what you're doing if you try to delay action on combating climate change.
But I think we can do better than that, don't you?
"Climate denialism is like kicking away from a kindly old man the special walking stick which his beloved late grandson carved for him shortly before he was eaten by wolves."